Hasbrouck v. Texaco, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
879 F.2d 632 · 1989
Citation profile
27 federal appellate · 6 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently January 2022 · most notably Reazin v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Kansas, Inc. (1990), Bergmann v. Boyce (1993)
27 federal appellate · 6 district · 3 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 13 (§ 2 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 15 (§ 4 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914)
Relies on Browder v. Director Department of Corrections of Illinois · Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc. · California State Board of Equalization v. Western Marina Corp. · City of Riverside v. Rivera · Blanchard v. Bergeron
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he nomenclature the movant uses is not controlling. This court must decide whether a motion, however styled, is appropriate for the relief requested.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“it was impressed with testimony ‘that competent counsel would not undertake representation of plaintiffs in [contingent fee antitrust cases] if they were only paid their regular hourly rates_Thus, without an adjustment for the risk of losing, plaintiffs “would have faced substantial difficulties in finding counsel in the local or other relevant market.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“every item of service which, at the time rendered, would have been undertaken by a reasonably prudent lawyer to advance or protect his client's interest”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.